Re: Re:
D-Queued said:
(NB: Am trying to argue the point(s) in the post, and not the poster. If it appears otherwise, that is not the intent)
On #2, I am not going to do even a quick Google search. But, while someone(s) may be trying this, longer-term use of Cortisone is correlated with serious tissue/muscle loss, bone demineralisation, reduced protein synthesis, etc. issues. At least it did last time I looked.
So, it is possible that someone or some team could be using cortisone OOC, but only possible with serious risks.
And (without doing a quick Google, or forum, search), as I recall AICAR supposedly offers weight loss without that serious risk that cortisone produces.
The obvious question (i.e. Occam's Razor): Are we sure they (whoever they are) aren't using AICAR while stating that they use cortisone?
That would make more sense, and would be consistent with past behavior (altitude tents, etc.) to hide what is really going on.
On interval training (and this is what the NB above was for):
If people "probably would have thought" that interval training wouldn't benefit a highly trained athlete, and increase power (i.e. over shorter duration), then they are idiots.
That is what interval training is all about, and always has been. <insert facepalm>
It doesn't mean, however, that an athlete employing interval training can somehow avoid or offset the deteriorating impacts of longer-term cortisone use such as would be required for any meaningful weight-loss program.
Dave.
So, last reply before i have to head off.
Firstly, great post - engaging the argument, or as some would put it : playing the ball, rather than resorting other things.
You're definitely right on the cortisone side effects - well known. I guess it
may partly explain why Sky riders seem to fall to pieces after a couple of years. I'll take what you say about AICAR as right - I haven't had time to look, not sure if its been around long enough for people to assess / understand the longer term risks.
As for whether they could be using AICAR but saying Cortisone. Of course that is entirely possible, but, in my view, carries some risks :
1. A new test appears that is implemented with little fanfare.
2. A leak from within the team / ex-team. What if one of the ZTP casualties went postal (pardon the expression) and started blurting it all out?
3. Someone gets careless with a syringe / packaging.
4. Retrospective testing is implemented whilst DB, or whoever, is still there covering the banned period.
All of those carry a risk of being popped and the house of cards falling down. OOC cortisone doesn't - with a decent doctor and some internal testing it would be easy to be 'ill' or have a complaint that required a TUE just in case. Combine that with other things (both grey and not so grey) and you could have a 'legal' program.
Interesting to note that one of the longer term side effects is high blood pressure. And what do we treat high blood pressure with? Telmisartan ...
As for the interval stuff - I think the point you're making is that it wouldn't be enough to compensate for the cortisone deterioration. But that deterioration is longer term is it not? Not in the 12 month build up to a GT. Again maybe helps explain the breakdown of riders after a few years.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram